Talk To Me About The Engl Savage 120

[SavageRiffer]

This is the only Engl besides the Victor Smolski and Marty Friedman that I have limited experience with. I've played the Savage only once or twice, so I'm not totally unfamiliar. I remember playing it thinking it would be over-the-top metal, but was surprised to hear super nice clean, breakup, and low gain sounds. I've been thinking about getting one because it operates on 2 power tubes + has an emulated output that you can use without a load. That's a big plus.

Anyway, I'm intimately familiar with the Invader, Morse, Screamer, Thunder, Ironball, Powerball, and Fireball. How does the Savage compare? Would you say it's a metal amp that can do other music, or an overall great amp that can kick ass at metal? Has anyone used the emulated output for recording? What is your experience with the Savage?

 

[Speeddemon]

I can tell you about the Savage 60, which I own next to an Invader 100 and Ironball.

2 channels, Rhythm and Lead. The Rhythm channel's gain knob is influencing the amount of gain on the Lead channel too. Both channels have independent boost knobs for more gain.
This means that if you want the Rhythm channel completely clean, you can't get the real brutal sound from the Lead channel. It will still do a thick (classic_ heavy metal tone, but not that elusive Savage magic.

Compared to the Invader, the Clean sound that you can get out of the Savage is nice, but not Invader-sparkly wide nice. Even with higher output humbuckers the Invader's clean channel can remain really clean.
Then the 'money' sound of the Savage (crank both Gain knobs to say 2 'o clock or even higher, while playing on the lead channel). This is akin to the Invader's 3rd channel in High gain mode, but less processed, more organic, raw and ferocious.

I've heard very conflicting statements of the in-between sounds of the Savage 120, given that it has at least 4 'channels' vs. the 2 channels of the Savage 60, so I can't tell you anything useful there.
I *have* played the Savage SE recently, next to the Invader, Savage 60 and a Marshall JVM410H...I found the Savage SE's crunch channel pretty decent, but not 'magical', and the Crunch 2/Lead 1 sound to be a bit lacklustre. Also the clean of the Savage SE, while nice, was not in the same league of the Invader's clean.

Now before a certain opionated forumite comes rushing in, no, I don't consider the Invader to be the holy grail of Engl amps. At all. There are a few things that could've been better; a rawer, crunchier tone in Channel 2 for instance. A bit more typical Engl Savage tone in Channel 3, and I'd rather have Channel 4 (which is now VERRRY middy and loose, only useful for leads...it *is* a tone that works live though) to be more in-line with Channel 3.
But 10 years ago (when I bought it in September) it was *the* amp with the best set of features and tones I was (and still am) looking for.
Gorgeous cleans, Marshally crunch (which could be improved), the Engl high gain tone, switchable fx-loop and dual masters. And hey, a noise gate too!

One main reason for me NOT to consider the Savage 120 is the lack of a footswitchable fx-loop without resorting to MIDI. Since my Savage 60 is now used at home, this is less of a concern, although I have plans to mod it for that.
But yeah, Exodus' and Primal Fear cop some awesome tones and I find the Engl Savage sound easier to eq and get rid of any nastyness than a typical 5150 tone.

 

[SavageRiffer]

I can tell you about the Savage 60, which I own next to an Invader 100 and Ironball.

2 channels, Rhythm and Lead. The Rhythm channel's gain knob is influencing the amount of gain on the Lead channel too. Both channels have independent boost knobs for more gain.
This means that if you want the Rhythm channel completely clean, you can't get the real brutal sound from the Lead channel. It will still do a thick (classic_ heavy metal tone, but not that elusive Savage magic.

Compared to the Invader, the Clean sound that you can get out of the Savage is nice, but not Invader-sparkly wide nice. Even with higher output humbuckers the Invader's clean channel can remain really clean.
Then the 'money' sound of the Savage (crank both Gain knobs to say 2 'o clock or even higher, while playing on the lead channel). This is akin to the Invader's 3rd channel in High gain mode, but less processed, more organic, raw and ferocious.

I've heard very conflicting statements of the in-between sounds of the Savage 120, given that it has at least 4 'channels' vs. the 2 channels of the Savage 60, so I can't tell you anything useful there.
I *have* played the Savage SE recently, next to the Invader, Savage 60 and a Marshall JVM410H...I found the Savage SE's crunch channel pretty decent, but not 'magical', and the Crunch 2/Lead 1 sound to be a bit lacklustre. Also the clean of the Savage SE, while nice, was not in the same league of the Invader's clean.

Now before a certain opionated forumite comes rushing in, no, I don't consider the Invader to be the holy grail of Engl amps. At all. There are a few things that could've been better; a rawer, crunchier tone in Channel 2 for instance. A bit more typical Engl Savage tone in Channel 3, and I'd rather have Channel 4 (which is now VERRRY middy and loose, only useful for leads...it *is* a tone that works live though) to be more in-line with Channel 3.
But 10 years ago (when I bought it in September) it was *the* amp with the best set of features and tones I was (and still am) looking for.
Gorgeous cleans, Marshally crunch (which could be improved), the Engl high gain tone, switchable fx-loop and dual masters. And hey, a noise gate too!

One main reason for me NOT to consider the Savage 120 is the lack of a footswitchable fx-loop without resorting to MIDI. Since my Savage 60 is now used at home, this is less of a concern, although I have plans to mod it for that.
But yeah, Exodus' and Primal Fear cop some awesome tones and I find the Engl Savage sound easier to eq and get rid of any nastyness than a typical 5150 tone.

The Invader II is my favorite, but unfortunately, it doesn't have speaker emulation/silent recording like the Savage. I like simpler tube amps too, and like amps that are less expensive to replace dual tubes than quads, so that's another reason why I'm considering a Savage. Having MIDI capability is a bonus. I want the Invader tone, but I prefer the Savage features.

 

[Speeddemon]

I haven't tried the emulated out on my Savage 60, but I have on the Ironball.

A while ago, right before selling my Tech21 TM30 combo (which had one of the best sounding line-outs!), I did a recording for myself, comparing a Palmer PDI-09 The Junction box to the TM30 XLR out, the Ironball compensated line-out and the Mesa Mark V:25's Cab Clone; both loaded and unloaded.
The Ironball was passable, but nowhere near the top. Funny enough the Cab Clone sounded MILES better with a cab connected to the amp too. Without it, it was utter crap. The Junction and TM30 were the best, but since the TM30 lacked channel switching or even a good wide clean sound (it was always slightly dirty or too thin, but its Marshall-esque sounds were amazing), it had to go.

By the way, in terms of clean tone I'd rate them as follows:
1) Invader
2) Savage 60 (Rhythm gain at 9 'o clock, rhythm boost OFF, bright ON)
3) Ironball (Clean gain around 9 'o clock, boost OFF)

 

[stratjacket]

I can tell you about the Savage 60, which I own next to an Invader 100 and Ironball.

2 channels, Rhythm and Lead. The Rhythm channel's gain knob is influencing the amount of gain on the Lead channel too. Both channels have independent boost knobs for more gain.
This means that if you want the Rhythm channel completely clean, you can't get the real brutal sound from the Lead channel. It will still do a thick (classic_ heavy metal tone, but not that elusive Savage magic.

Wow, that would be a no-go for me. I wonder if the 120 has that same property?

 

[SavageRiffer]

I haven't tried the emulated out on my Savage 60, but I have on the Ironball.

A while ago, right before selling my Tech21 TM30 combo (which had one of the best sounding line-outs!), I did a recording for myself, comparing a Palmer PDI-09 The Junction box to the TM30 XLR out, the Ironball compensated line-out and the Mesa Mark V:25's Cab Clone; both loaded and unloaded.
The Ironball was passable, but nowhere near the top. Funny enough the Cab Clone sounded MILES better with a cab connected to the amp too. Without it, it was utter crap. The Junction and TM30 were the best, but since the TM30 lacked channel switching or even a good wide clean sound (it was always slightly dirty or too thin, but its Marshall-esque sounds were amazing), it had to go.

By the way, in terms of clean tone I'd rate them as follows:
1) Invader
2) Savage 60 (Rhythm gain at 9 'o clock, rhythm boost OFF, bright ON)
3) Ironball (Clean gain around 9 'o clock, boost OFF)

Have you ever tried the Steve Morse signature head? It has even better cleans than the Invader. I haven't played the SE to draw a comparison, but the Steve Morse head has the best cleans of any Engl I've tried. Anyway, what's the difference between the Savage 60 and 120?

 

[Speeddemon]

I can tell you about the Savage 60, which I own next to an Invader 100 and Ironball.

2 channels, Rhythm and Lead. The Rhythm channel's gain knob is influencing the amount of gain on the Lead channel too. Both channels have independent boost knobs for more gain.
This means that if you want the Rhythm channel completely clean, you can't get the real brutal sound from the Lead channel. It will still do a thick (classic_ heavy metal tone, but not that elusive Savage magic.

I wonder if the 120 has that same property?

Apparently it does. But the Savage 120 has 4 'channels', and since Clean is shared with Crunch 1, that means you could still keep your clean really clean and the Lead 1 really crushing.

See also:
http://www.harmonycentral.com/reviews/p ... 120/358484


@Savageriffer; I *have* played the Morse once. I remember it being extremely nice and since the 3rd channel has the mid matrix, it's interesting to say the least.
It's just that the blue front is soooo offputting. To a lesser extent, I don't care either for the glossy Engl logo (also on my Invader and Ironball). If only went back to that sanded/brushed nickel look for the logo and frontplate, like on the Savages and Blackmore amps for this...I don't like all the glossy stuff. It's a bit tacky. Whether it's a kitchen faucet, a pair of cufflinks (yep, even this thrash/heavy metal playin' Rigtalker has the occasional black tie event to attend )or amp logo, I prefer brushed/satin look and try to avoid chrome at all cost.

Further differences:
Savage 60 is 2 channels only, 60W, 2x EL34, only 1 fx-loop and has one pre-amp tube less if I'm not mistaken.
Has a bright button, individual channel boost buttons (for more gain and saturation), 1 master volume, individual Presence knobs (per channel) and Depth Boost button per channel (which are definitely NEEDED).

The 120 has some more buttons (contour, rough/smooth, preshape, sens.) and 2 masters and switchable presence A/B (instead of 1 per channel).

 

[SavageRiffer]

I can tell you about the Savage 60, which I own next to an Invader 100 and Ironball.

2 channels, Rhythm and Lead. The Rhythm channel's gain knob is influencing the amount of gain on the Lead channel too. Both channels have independent boost knobs for more gain.
This means that if you want the Rhythm channel completely clean, you can't get the real brutal sound from the Lead channel. It will still do a thick (classic_ heavy metal tone, but not that elusive Savage magic.

I wonder if the 120 has that same property?

Apparently it does. But the Savage 120 has 4 'channels', and since Clean is shared with Crunch 1, that means you could still keep your clean really clean and the Lead 1 really crushing.

See also:
http://www.harmonycentral.com/reviews/p ... 120/358484


@Savageriffer; I *have* played the Morse once. I remember it being extremely nice and since the 3rd channel has the mid matrix, it's interesting to say the least.
It's just that the blue front is soooo offputting. To a lesser extent, I don't care either for the glossy Engl logo (also on my Invader and Ironball). If only went back to that sanded/brushed nickel look for the logo and frontplate, like on the Savages and Blackmore amps for this...I don't like all the glossy stuff. It's a bit tacky. Whether it's a kitchen faucet, a pair of cufflinks (yep, even this thrash/heavy metal playin' Rigtalker has the occasional black tie event to attend )or amp logo, I prefer brushed/satin look and try to avoid chrome at all cost.

Further differences:
Savage 60 is 2 channels only, 60W, 2x EL34, only 1 fx-loop and has one pre-amp tube less if I'm not mistaken.
Has a bright button, individual channel boost buttons (for more gain and saturation), 1 master volume, individual Presence knobs (per channel) and Depth Boost button per channel (which are definitely NEEDED).

The 120 has some more buttons (contour, rough/smooth, preshape, sens.) and 2 masters and switchable presence A/B (instead of 1 per channel).

I didn't realize the Savage 60 had EL34s. I'm thinking that would sound great. Probably less low end, a little more compression, spongier, etc. I like 6550s a lot, but in some amps they can get a bit harsh in the high end. However the way the Savage is EQ'd, I wonder if EL34s can get too spiky. Pretty cool. Do you have some audio?

 

[MetalHeadMike]

The Savage 120 can definitely get decent tones outside of metal, but IMO metal is where it shines. The 6550s bring great crunch and grind with this amp and to my ears there's nothing harsh about the high end.

Ch 1 crunch mode can definitely get you into to some decent classic rock tones, and Ch 2 mode 1 can get you into hard rock. Ch 2 mode 2 has been my favorite metal tone to date from any amp, but there are still many amps out there I still need to try

Compared to the FB100, the Savage is more raw, crunchy, and tight. The Savage is a brighter amp, and its brighter in the mids. The FB100 is a darker amp and is more compressed/saturated.

Never say never, but I'm pretty sure the Savage 120 will not be leaving my possession.

 

[SavageRiffer]

The Savage 120 can definitely get decent tones outside of metal, but IMO metal is where it shines. The 6550s bring great crunch and grind with this amp and to my ears there's nothing harsh about the high end.

Ch 1 crunch mode can definitely get you into to some decent classic rock tones, and Ch 2 mode 1 can get you into hard rock. Ch 2 mode 2 has been my favorite metal tone to date from any amp, but there are still many amps out there I still need to try

Compared to the FB100, the Savage is more raw, crunchy, and tight. The Savage is a brighter amp, and its brighter in the mids. The FB100 is a darker amp and is more compressed/saturated.

Never say never, but I'm pretty sure the Savage 120 will not be leaving my possession.

You mean the Fireball? I thought the Fireball was pretty damned tight and crunchy. I don't remember the Savage being any more so, but hard to remember. Could the Savage bee too tight & crunchy at times perhaps?

 

[MetalHeadMike]

^^^
Yes the Fireball 100.
When comparing my Fireball 100 to the Savage 120 when plugged straight in, the Savage 120 is MUCH tighter and MUCH crunchier. The FB100 is fairly tight unboosted and gets even tighter the louder its cranked, but no where near as tight as the Savage. I have to clean boost the FB100 with a TS9 to get to the same level of tightness as the Savage.

The FB100 is also much smoother in its gain structure IMO, and isn't near as crunchy as the Savage. That's not to say the FB100 doesn't sound aggressive, its just a more compressed darker tone. I feel like the FB100 needs to be cranked up a little bit to get into the goods, and once cranked its downright vicious, wear as the Savage gives up the goods at more reasonable volumes. The FB100 sounds great at bedroom volumes but then becomes REALLY great when cranked up a bit.

As far as the Savage being too tight, I'd say that depends on the rest of your chain. I've been playing the Savage through a G12K-100 loaded 2x12 since I got the amp and through a superstrat loaded with a Bare Knuckle Painkiller bridge and at times when I'm not spot on (which is more often than not), yes its too tight and unforgiving; with this set up you can hide NOTHING!
But man, when your warmed up or just having a good day, its amazing.

I just picked up an EVH 4x12 and it seems like the perfect match for the Savage. Those speakers give the Savage the perfect amount of sag in the low end and also sweeten up the mids a highs a bit. Its an amazing combination

FWIW, the Savage I have is post 2011 with the larger OT. Not saying that its that much tighter than the older Savages because I've never played one, just stating details.

 

[MetalHeadMike]

The Savage 120 can definitely get decent tones outside of metal, but IMO metal is where it shines. The 6550s bring great crunch and grind with this amp and to my ears there's nothing harsh about the high end.

Ch 1 crunch mode can definitely get you into to some decent classic rock tones, and Ch 2 mode 1 can get you into hard rock. Ch 2 mode 2 has been my favorite metal tone to date from any amp, but there are still many amps out there I still need to try

Compared to the FB100, the Savage is more raw, crunchy, and tight. The Savage is a brighter amp, and its brighter in the mids. The FB100 is a darker amp and is more compressed/saturated.

Never say never, but I'm pretty sure the Savage 120 will not be leaving my possession.

You mean the Fireball? I thought the Fireball was pretty damned tight and crunchy. I don't remember the Savage being any more so, but hard to remember. Could the Savage bee too tight & crunchy at times perhaps?

Here's the same riff and same shitty playing through both amps:

Fireball 100_ clean boosted with TS9
https://soundcloud.com/user-549632051/m ... av/s-XhBv4

Savage 120_Guitar straight in
https://soundcloud.com/user-549632051/m ... av/s-qWRCI

 

[Speeddemon]

I wonder if the 120 has that same property?

Here you can hear that effect (of how 'Clean gain' influences 'Crunch 1' gain and how 'Crunch 2' influences 'Lead 1'.)

Not the best of videos, but you get an idea (not mine

That being said, by keeping Clean low, and just cranking Crunch 2 and Lead 1, you can still get the glassy cleans + brootz in the same amp. This is unfortunately not possible with the Savage 60.

 

[SavageRiffer]

I wonder if the 120 has that same property?

Here you can hear that effect (of how 'Clean gain' influences 'Crunch 1' gain and how 'Crunch 2' influences 'Lead 1'.)

Not the best of videos, but you get an idea (not mine

That being said, by keeping Clean low, and just cranking Crunch 2 and Lead 1, you can still get the glassy cleans + brootz in the same amp. This is unfortunately not possible with the Savage 60.

Damn that's a badass amp.